Wednesday, August 31, 2005

The British New Testament Conference starts today and is hosted this year by Liverpool Hope University. I will be going along and will take my blogging machine with me. I doubt that there will be any wireless or other internet access -- I've not known it thus far with any of the BNTC locations -- but you never know. But at some point, expect some reports. And I look forward to seeing some of you there.

I had the pleasure of meeting Bill Warren and several of his students in Biblical Textual Criticism from the New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary at the Birmingham Colloquium in April. I have been wondering about them over the last few days given the devastation wrought by Hurrican Katrina. The seminary does have a Hurricane Katrina Update, which gives some idea of the extent of the devastation, as they attempt to set up temporary offices elsewhere, looking to locate members of the faculty. I hope all is well with them; they too are in our thoughts and prayers.

Update (Monday, 5 September, 13.58): Jim West has more on Biblical Theology. I also heard via my colleague David Parker that Bill Warren and his colleagues are all safe and well, though naturally their lives are in unpheaval.

I've now refreshed the Scholars: M page on the NT Gateway, adding Scot McKnight's page, changing URLs to several others (usual complaint: none of them had set up automatic forwards), and deleting Bruce Malina's page, which has gone password-protected, and deleting David Mealand (gone) and David Mealand (gone).

Update (Thursday, 00.57): And thanks to Scot McKnight for his kind mention in his blog Jesus Creed.

I've updated several URLs, and this always gives me a chance to see how the quiet open-source revolution on scholars' homepages is continuing. It's something I've often mentioned here, but it is exciting to see the extent to which scholarship is being made available to a wide audience through reproductions on scholars' homepages. The latest excellent contribution to this revolution is Randall Chesnutt who has the following of his articles available as PDFs on the site for all to view:

"Covenant and Cosmos in Wisdom of Solomon 10-19," in The Concept of the Covenant in the Second Temple Period, eds. Stanley E. Porter and Jacqueline C. R. de Roo. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 71. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Pp. 223-49.

My move away from Birmingham necessitates a move of my homepage, which has been located at http://theology.bham.ac.uk/goodacre in Birmingham for several years. I have moved all the content over to a new template I've adjusted from the NT Gateway templates, so you'll recognise the look. Please let me have any criticisms or suggestions (and no, I can't do anything about my grinning face, I am afraid):

While I have moved the content over, I have also done a bit of an update to the information contained. And its URL is, following the standard means of organising things here, http://NTGateway.com/goodacre.

ITSEE is the name of a new institute at the University of Birmingham, the Institute for Textual Scholarship and Electronic Editing, created in May this year, the directors of which are my long time colleague David Parker and my new colleague Peter Robinson. It has a smart new website, including a news section, and it's well worth a visit:

I have commented previously on the Times Obituary of Neville Birdsall written by my colleague David Parker. Thanks to Richard Birdsall for pointing out to me that there was also an obituary in The Independent:

I'm excited about this book, which is definitely the best study of the resurrection. (I know from proof-reading a part of it.) It steers between the poles of Wright and Ludemann, using the best of both worlds while eschewing dogmatism from either side. Dale makes a good case for historicity of the empty tomb, though differently than Wright, and with sanity by recognizing the variety of possibilities which could account for an empty tomb -- an actual resurrection being but one of them. Then too he dabbles into grief-induced visions, though again, better than Ludemann does, and with less dogmatic surety. Dale well understands that Jesus expected to suffer and die (probably expected some of his followers to die too) as a necessary prelude to the apocalypse. That apocalypse, about which our Galilean friend was obviously mistaken.

Update (Wednesday, 19.10): On The Busybody Loren Rosson notes that the books is now available. I'm hoping that Continuum bring a batch with them to the BNTC tomorrow; it will be the first book I'm after. Meanwhile, on Jesus Creed, Scot McKnight speaks of getting Allison, Segal and Wright together (and in comments Rosson rightly adds Lüdeman) for a juicy debate on all of this. Great idea.

Spare a thought or a prayer for biblioblogger Michael Homan who has not signed back in since Sunday and at that point sounded pretty concerned about Hurrican Katrina, The Die is Cast. Hope all's well, Michael.

Monday, August 29, 2005

If you are in North Carolina (wish I was), Eric Meyers will be on UNC public television this week:

----Jewish Heritage Foundation of NC in the spotlight on UNC-TV (www.jhfnc.org)

Don't miss seeing Dr. Eric Meyers in a fascinating conversation with William Friday on the North Carolina People program, airing on Friday, September 2, 2005 at 9:00 p.m. and Sunday, September 4, 2005 at 5:30 p.m. The origins of the Jewish Heritage Foundation of NC, the continuing influence of Rabbi Efraim Rosenzweig on our work, the Down Home project, and Dr. Meyers remarkable career as an archeologist and scholar are among the topics in this erudite and wide-ranging discussion.

The program will also air in all of the NC Channel slots during the week -- Monday, at 7:00 am, 8:30 am, and 12:30 p.m., Wednesday, at 8:00 a.m., 12:00 p.m., 4:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m. UNC-TV’s NC Channel is available to those with a digital tuner or digital cable with Time Warner.

If you miss the air times, the interview will also be available streaming on the Web for a month. Point your browser to:

My first class in my new job at Duke University, Dept of Religion starts today. It's Introduction to the New Testament and meets at 1.30 . . . . . except that I'm not there to teach it. I'm still in Birmingham awaiting the arrival of my visa. Everything else is pretty much in place. You might say that I am "virtually" there -- I have a faculty page and a working email address (goodacre@duke.edu), I've set up all my teaching on the Blackboard site which Duke uses. Incidentally, I've enjoyed using Blackboard for the first time. So far, pretty intuitive and straightforward.

So what's the plan? Dr Andrew Mbuvi is teaching my NT class until I arrive in person. We await more news from US immigration. I am still hopeful that we will be able to move within the next two to three weeks, but it is impossible to say more until we hear more. In the mean time, one bonus of still being here is that I will take a last visit to the British New Testament Conference at the end of this week. I look forward to seeing some of you there.

Update (Tuesday, 1.16): Not long after writing the above post, I heard from Duke International Office that that my H1-B visa has been approved; now I await an appointment at the US consulate in London.

Tuesday, August 23, 2005

If you are interested in Jesus films, one of life's little mysteries is how the Jesus film (John Krish & Peter Sykes, 1979) can be so successful as an international tool of evangelism when it is so bad. On Filmchat Peter Chattaway points to an interesting piece in last week's New York Times:

Warren Smith, the publisher of an evangelical Christian newspaper in Charlotte, N.C., compares the movie "Jesus" to the jawbone of an ass.

That is, it does not matter if the movie, a 1979 box office flop, has a gooey soundtrack and a British voiceover, or if the actor who plays Jesus breathes noticeably as he lies in the tomb. If a weapon as unlikely as a jawbone can slay an army, as the biblical story goes, then "Jesus," direct-mailed on DVD to every household in Mecklenburg County, N.C., can offer salvation.

Not so sure that having a British voiceover can be held against it. I'd never even noticed. Is it British? Isn't it Richard Kiley and isn't he American? There are some nice stories in the article, including this:

A turning point came when a doctor in Birmingham, Ala., Robert Cosby, bought 1.7 million copies and mailed them in 1998 to every household in Alabama, although he "wasn't very impressed" when he saw the film.

"I mean, it was a nice film," Mr. Cosby recalled the other day, speaking by telephone from his home. "I would say it was moderately good."

The mailing included Mr. Cosby's home address and telephone number. One day, he said, he found a copy of the video in his front yard with a note that said, "Jesus has returned."

Hopping on to yet another tangent, I saw this film on the big screen when it was brand new, and I bought a copy of Lee Roddy's novelization that still occupies a prominent place on my Jesus-movies bookshelf. That's right, a film whose big selling point was that it was for the most part a word-for-word adaptation of the Gospel of Luke was novelized.

And if you don't own a copy yet, you can pick one up on Amazon for $0.01! An offer not to be missed, surely.

This book examines visual representations of the public ministry of Christ in scenes unique to the Gospel of Luke. Scenes depicting the birth, suffering, and crucifixion of Christ no doubt dominated the visual repertoire of medieval and renaissance artists. Nonetheless, the miracles and teachings of Jesus also inspired numerous depictions, not only during the period of the earliest Christian art but continuing throughout the Italian Renaissance and Baroque periods. The book demonstrates how this “visual exegesis” might enrich our understanding of Luke’s Gospel and at the same time inform the contemporary faith community’s interpretation of Scripture. Each of these chapters begins with an overview of the biblical passage and its subsequent interpretation, noting significant rhetorical features and the overarching theological argument of the text, as well as outlining a brief summary of its subsequent interpretation in the ecclesiastical literature. Next, the selected work of art is lent context by giving a brief biography of the artist, placing the work within the artist’s own oeuvre, discussing what is known of the patronage of the specific mage, and exploring important social, political and religious factors which may facilitate our understanding of the painting. A stylistic and iconographic analysis is followed by brief hermeneutical reflections about how this visual interpretation might inform the church’s reading of Scripture.

Illuminating Luke will appeal broadly to students of the Bible and the history of Christian art. Scholars and students interested in the history of biblical interpretation will benefit from this book. Likewise, educated laypersons and pastors will find in its pages rich resources for theological reflection

Reviews for Illuminating Luke, Volume 2

"Hornick and Parsons rightly discern that biblical texts cannot be segregated from their 'afterlife,' and that the interpretive tradition cannot be limited to the linear words of the treatise or commentary. Bycontextualizing key exemplars of the "visual exegesis" of selected scenes from Jesus' public ministry unique to Luke, they draw us into the history of Luke's reception in ways that are equally elegant and engaging. Here is a book that both excites critical reflection and invites joyful participation. Joel B. Green, Professor of New Testament Interpretation, Vice President of Academic Affairs & Provost, Asbury Theological Seminary

"One of the endlessly-interesting things about studying works of art is that so many different approaches are possible. The series entitled 'Illuminating Luke' chooses to examine a few works in exaustive but enlightening detail. One comes away from each example with a greater understanding not only of some of the meanings the work conveyed at the moment of its creation, but also of an increased awareness into how it can be understood in our modern world." -David G. Wilkins, Professor Emeritus of the History of Art and Architecture, University of Pittsburgh

"This book is an eye-opener! Fascinating discussion of five stunning Italian paintings opens up intriguing vistas on key passages in Luke's Gospel. A wide readership will appreciate the authors' clarity and rigour, and will look forward eagerly to the final volume in a trilogy which will be a landmark in our appreciation of the 'visual exegesis' of Luke's Gospel."-Graham Stanton, Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity, University of Cambridge

Thursday, August 18, 2005

The updates are to the Short Papers -- full programme (minus one abstract) now available -- and to Johannine Literature, where there is a change in the programme.

As it happens, I sent my own booking in today, since it now looks like I am going to be able to make it after all. It's a conference I always look forward to, so I am very pleased that I should be able to make it, having earlier thought that it would not be possible.

A review of currents of change that have characterized traditional and recent interpretative models of critical gospel interpretation. The author characterizes changes that occurred up to and since the 1970s, noting how recent developments have integrated critical methods of the 19th and 20th centuries into a performance mode as in music and drama.

After the concepts of "society," "culture," and the "embeddedness of religion" have been reviewed from the standpoint of the social sciences, religion's place in antiquity is considered in relationship to the Judean temple, ecclesia and synagogue, and the controverted terms "Jew" and "Christian." The meaning of religion, and the role it plays in human affairs, is argued to be fundamentally dependent upon its location in society or culture.

American institutions, both public and private, dominate the list but this year Stanford has ceded second place to Cambridge. Oxford has dropped from eighth to 10th in the table which its compilers admit favours science. The number of Nobel prize winners among alumni and on the staff count towards 30% of the ranking and Cambridge alumni almost equals Harvard's in this respect . . . .

. . . . UK university continue to perform well against the European competition - Cambridge, Oxford, Imperial and University College London take the top four places in Europe, with Edinburgh in ninth position. Manchester, Bristol, Sheffield, King's College London and Nottingham are all in the top 30 universities in Europe.

But of course we are all going to use this list to see where our universities figure, those where we studied and those where we work. It's difficult to resist the urge to look. Oxford, where I studied, is still in the top 10, just. Birmingham, where I work, just makes the Top 100, coming in at 98, dropping five places from last year (see last year's comment here), but that's still pretty respectable. Duke, where I am moving in September, is at 32.

Tuesday, August 16, 2005

Thanks to Mathew Schlechter for alerting me to the need to refresh all my links on the NT Gateway to articles that were hosted on the old Synoptic-L site, now at http://NTGateway.com/synoptic-l. I am referring to the links to articles on this page:

Monday, August 15, 2005

It looks like the list has been put together by Matt Page and it's splendidly comprehensive. Leaders so far are Jim Caviezel (not Cavaziel) and Robert Powell. I like Caviezel's portrayal, but I'm not a fan of Powell's. I'll have to sleep on this question to work out who my one vote should go to. I'm tempted to say Henry Ian Cusick, of the Gospel of John. There are elements in lots of them I like, e.g. parts of Willem Dafoe's Jesus in Last Temptation of Christ, but not all of it; and I like some of Jeremy Sisto's Jesus (1999) and Ted Neeley's (not Neely) Jesus Christ Superstar. Definite no's for me are Victor Garber (Godspell) and Max Von Sydow (Greatest Story).

Stung by a publishing industry backlash, Google Inc. has halted its efforts to scan copyrighted books from some of the nation's largest university libraries so the material can be indexed in its leading Internet search engine.

The company announced the suspension, effective until November, in a notice posted on its Web site just before midnight Thursday by Adam Smith, the manager of its ambitious program to convert millions of books into a digital format.

The announcement can be read on Google Blog, which is a great deal more up-beat than the Associated Press article above.

Although neither the article nor Google's announcement make the distinction explicitly, it seems that the halt is not over the continuing Google Print project but specifically over the scanning of material in libraries. The vast majority of what I have found on Google Print (and it is a huge amount) is not from this older, scanned material, but from contemporary works that Google have taken over digitally from the publishers themselves, e.g. Cambridge University Press (cf. my recent post on Mark Chancey's book). This is comparable to what is going on on Amazon and the story that they tell is that the full-text availability tends to increase sales rather than the reverse. I'd be interested to hear more on whether there is evidence to back that up.

Update (15.38): more on The Google Weblog under the title Google Sells Out Users to Publishers. This post makes it clear that the issue is indeed one about whether or not to the books can be allowed to be scanned and so available for searching, and not necessarily that there would be full text availability on all the scanned books. This blog is pretty biting in its criticism of the publishers:

Publishers, in typical copyright-holder paranoia fashion worried that perhaps the two line snippets Google would be providing of their books would spell the end of the world for their entire industry . . . . That's right: Google won't even scan any book copyright holders ask them not to, even though doing so is perfectly legal. It's as if copyright holders got to dictate what books get placed in libraries. Their short-sighted selfishness will cost us all, depriving us of our heritage in our online Library of Alexandria.

Sunday, August 14, 2005

Matthew Page asks, "Where would you advise someone to start with Goulder?" Interesting question. In his hey-day, there's no question but I'd encourage someone to get to hear him live. I used to attend his day schools here in Birmingham when I was a student and watch him spar with the top scholars of the day, watching him win every time. (Michael did tend to see the sessions in terms of "winning" or not.) He told me once that he thought Richard Bauckham had proved a formidable opponent and that, because he (Michael) did not have a good response to Bauckham on the Ascension of Isaiah, that the result was a "draw".

But since his retirement in 1994, to get a flavour you need to begin with his writings. On the whole, Goulder has written for an academic audience, aiming at peers -- fellow scholars and post-graduate students, and taking for granted much of the introductory material. He's rarely been someone whose written work one can approach as a beginner. The major exception to this would be his Tale of Two Missions (London: SCM, 1994) [published in the US as Peter vs. Paul] which is an enjoyable paperback introduction to one of his later theories on Christian origins. So that might be a reasonable place to start. But it doesn't get to the heart of what I've most enjoyed about Michael Goulder's work. I think the book I most like is Midrash and Lection in Matthew (London: SPCK, 1974), brilliant, imaginative, under-rated. Perhaps next I'd list Luke: A New Paradigm (JSNTSup, 20; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1989). I've made one of his articles available on the web, "Is Q a Juggernaut?".

If you are familiar with Tom Wright's writings, you will recognise many of the characteristic emphases. If you are not familiar with them, this interview might actually be a useful introduction. But in addition, I was struck by this paragraph:

Q: What about the “Jesus Seminar”?A: I see that the “Jesus Seminar” has long since run out of steam. That was really an ’80s and ’90s movement with a bunch of scholars who were working within a very tight paradigm of what would count as gospel research. Most of that was laughed at at the time by the majority of the serious scholars in the field. Not all. There are some significant figures, such as John Dominic Crossan and Marcus Borg, who played a leading role. But most of the main Jesus scholars would never have had anything to do with that. So that the Seminar’s claim to be the scholarly take on all the subjects that it touched was never plausible, even at the time. And, actually, it’s died a death now. I mean, I don’t think anyone really takes it seriously.

Friday, August 12, 2005

The page features a short bio and then dozens of books from Sanders's collection for sale.

Update (Monday, 13.03): Sean the Baptist comments and no, I don't think it's "nerdy" to take pleasure in the idea of owning a great scholar's books. Perhaps we should add it to Michael Bird's NT Buff Top Ten. Of course the thrill is greatly increased if you are buying books from a scholar who wrote in books. I know (from Stephen Carlson) that Morton Smith himself regularly annotated his books. But not everyone does. I'm the son of a book-collector and never write in books and I know that many feel the same way.

If you can’t actually attend conferences at least read the seminar paper topics for various conferences like SBL, ETS, SNTS etc. Ask authors to email you their paper if you are interested in their seminar paper and you can’t attend.

I think that's a good suggestion, and I'd add: don't just go to papers in the narrow area of your own research -- try to take an interest in as many as possible. Always attend plenary sessions where possible. A related but key point I'd also add would be perhaps too obvious for mentioning, but still vital:

7. Talk to people: at the conferences take an interest in other people's research, and when they are working in an area you are not familiar with, ask them what one ought to be reading in that area. What are that person's pick of the last few years' books? What are the interesting ideas that deserve attention? Who are the "ones to watch" in that area?

Sean the Baptist goes on to quote a fascinating characterisation of the different kinds of scholar, from an assessment by John Knox of John A. T. Robinson:

"To be sure, there are many scholars so gifted and accomplished as not to be typical in either sense ... But for the larger number of us I believe one may say that the worker in New Testament studies will belong to one type or the other - to the more knowledgeable or the more imaginative. And I would maintain that the door to being a true, and even a distinguished, scholar is as widely open to the second type as to the first"

It's a fabulous quotation, and I love the idea of being "as widely open to the second type as the first" -- what a great way of making sure that one avoids the pitfalls of both. I'd say that to answer Sean's basic question towards the beginning of our careers, as most of us bibliobloggers are, is a difficult one. We become associated with a particular narrow area because we have so far only published, on the whole, in the one narrow area, and that might make us appear to be specialists. Perhaps those who now appear "specialist" will in due course become "generalists". It's difficult to say. So I suppose it is something that one will be able to pronounce on more confidently when looking back at one's career rather than looking forward at it.

Here's a way of nuancing the question. What type of NT scholar do you most admire? I must admit to a fondness for what I would call "ideas" people, i.e. "the more imaginative" in Knox's characterisation. Fundamentally, my favourite scholars are those who have the ability to think exciting new thoughts, to rework existing questions in interesting new directions. I am thinking in particular of scholars like Michael Goulder (I know, surprise, surprise) who might be criticized on various fronts, but who will never be criticized for being dull. He always makes me think about existing questions in new ways. Whose books or articles would you always leap on?

The more I think about this one, though, I think the characterisation really is too simplistic to be useful. We can all think of work-a-day scholars whose special ability is to keep on top of a range of material, both primary and secondary, but the best scholars are those who combine imagination and insight with knowledge and wisdom. The greatest of all living NT scholars in my book typifies this combination, E. P. Sanders. He radically rethinks consensus positions, lucidly explicating his own views, at which he has arrived on the basis of extensive but careful reading of the primary materials.

Update (Sunday, 21.18): Michael Pahl comments on The Stuff of Earth. I agree -- "New Testament studies could use a little more romance"! I remember getting some funny looks from students once when I said that I was a romantic and rather liked some of the romance in Jeremias's parable scholarship, in spite of the fact that I agreed with very little of it.

Michael hits an important note here, the question of the extent to which your teaching load makes you a generalists, something Sean the Baptist had also mentioned before. I think that this is where many of us are -- our research requires us to specialize while our teaching requires us to generalize. It's a healthy mix and one that ultimately works for good. The broad range of our teaching often makes us think relevant and interesting thoughts that impact on the precise and more specialized area of our research. The key is that we turn those teaching necessities into long term research opportunities, so that we don't get stuck in a rut, always researching the same old area.

Update (Sunday 21.26): for Danny Zacharias on Deinde, this is a "blogger-cooler" discussion. I like the term, and the comments. (Yes, "water-cooler" discussions is a term used in the UK too).

Thursday, August 11, 2005

On the Novum Testamentum blog, Brandon Wason mentions that his wife Wendy never reads his blog. It effectively draws attention to one of the strange dynamics of the blogging phenomenon, especially with professional blogs. Here I am in Birmingham reading blogs like Brandon's without having met him, while his nearest and dearest don't take a look at it. They are rather like the diary room in Big Brother, experienced by a big audience outside the circle of your immediate friends and family with whom you spend more of your time.

Another thought: when you know the blogger personally, it sometimes changes your perception of his/her blog. You hear some comments slightly differently.

Update (21.11): Jim West asks if my wife Viola reads my blog; the answer is no, I don't think she's ever looked at it. She has quite enough to put up with me yacking on about whatever I'm yacking on about at the time.

Now I must get back to some serious blogging. Is summer also "silly season" for the bloggers?

What emerges from this survey is nothing surprising to papyrologists: paleography is not the most effective method for dating texts, particularly those written in a literary hand. Roberts himself noted this point in his edition of P52. The real problem is the way scholars of the New Testament have used and abused papyrological evidence. I have not radically revised Roberts's work. I have not provided any third-century documentary papyri that are absolute "dead ringers" for the handwriting of P52, and even had I done so, that would not force us to date P52 at some exact point in the third century. Paleographic evidence does not work that way. What I have done is to show that any serious consideration of the window of possible dates for P52 must include dates in the later second and early third centuries. Thus, P52cannot be used as evidence to silence other debates about the existence (or non-existence) of the Gospel of John in the first half of the second century. Only a papyrus containing an explicit date or one found in a clear archaeological stratigraphic context could do the work scholars want P52 to do. As it stands now, the papyrological evidence should take a second place to other forms of evidence in addressing debates about the dating of the Fourth Gospel.

It looks like an important article -- it's a staple of introductory courses on the New Testament that P52 provides us with a nice fix-able date in the very early second century that acts as an anchor for a lot of other datings. It looks like people will need to revise those sorts of over-simplistic appeal to over precise attempts to date this fragment.

There's one thing I'd like to come back to. I am not trying to put a dampener on things when I talk about the current situation, noticing the extent to which major advances have been made by both salaried professionals and gifted amateurs (for want of better terms). On the contrary, I think it's important that we recognise that all the major advances that have been made in our area in terms of on-line provision of quality educational materials has been done within the model of dynamic evolution driven by the enthusiasts.

If a professional association really wants its members to gain mindshare, to raise the level of public discourse over the topics it addresses, that organization ought to commission educational materials from its leading exponents and distribute them online — for a tiny proportion of what mainstream-media campaigns cost.

Yes, that won’t reach every audience segment, and perhaps it won’t reach certain audiences at all (though I’m inclined to suspect that a vigorous online sphere of attention would at least stand to generate side-channel interest and awareness). Some professional association ought to give it a try, someday. (I would single out the Society of Biblical Literature and Catholic Biblical Association, but these have no PR budget at all, to the best of my knowledge. Still wouldn’t cost them much to do a world of good.)

A suggestion: why not share this proposal with SBL? Indeed, a more specific proposal: why not write a short article on it for the SBL Forum and see what interest it generates? Perhaps the forum can itself carry the proposal forward in the future? But I'd come back here again to one of my basic points, that we may end up still talking about what the SBL calls "volunteer" efforts. I don't know whether the top post-holders in the SBL earn anything for their services, but it is clear to me that the vast majority of those who contribute to the SBL by running seminars, sitting on boards and so on, are volunteers -- they see it as a part of their professional duty and joy. So even on the assumption that we can move forward with involvement from the professional societies, we may need to recognise that the one thing that they are not going to be able to provide is extensive funding.

Mark, I am encouraged to hear that you feel enough freedom and institutional support to suppose that we can make great headway without the addition of funded leaves, stipends, or equipment; not everyone has the same experience. (Will Brum be searching for someone to fill your position?) I don’t expect unanimity on this topic, but the responses I’ve encountered over the years suggest that the theological academy will prefer to lag than to leap. I’d be tickled to be proved wrong, though.

AKMA's comments in some ways make my point. Perhaps Birmingham is more generous than are other institutions, but I don't think so: we get one term's sabbatical in every ten, and that sabbatical ("funded leave") I would always use in part to work on on-line resources. I say "in part" because there is a bunch of other stuff I'd use it for too, and writing would admittedly be a higher priority. Likewise on "stipends, or equipment" -- this is what I mean by our institutions providing support by employing us and giving us a salary and a computer. Things are far from rosey in UK academia -- I have bought my own home desktop and my own laptop out of my own funds, for example -- but I think it's worth recognizing it is the job, the institutional support that enables one to do a lot of what one does.

For the record, I'm inclined to think that whatever the nature of the project(s) will be, funding will be an absolute necessity. Now, mostly that's for pragmatic reasons. But I'm also thinking primarily of the need for academics, in particular, to be able to demonstrate their research output: I have a sneaking suspicion that something like the British RAE, or New Zealand PBRF, is simply never going to acknowledge any non-print work as valid research unless it's part of a project that's legitimated by some funding body or other.

I would guess that that is right, at least as far as the RAE (=Research Assessment Exercise) is concerned. If any readers have experience on the RAE panels, I'd be interested to hear if that is not the case. For myself, I have never submitted an electronic item to the RAE, in spite of the fact that I have put far more hours into developing electronic resources than I have writing books and articles that I have submitted. I remember a colleague once asking me why I devoted so much time to developing electronic resources when it was clear that they would not be recognized by the RAE. I don't recall how I answered, but what I would say now is that academics should not live by the RAE alone and that there is a great deal more to working in a university than trying to satisfy the RAE panel, important though that may be. Moreover we need to be wary of playing into an either / or here. What can be exciting about providing on-line resources is that they can work together with one's research in such a way that they help to generate, overlap and interact with print publications.

Update (23.21): On Sansblogue Tim Bulkeley has further useful reflections, focusing especially on the importance of collaboration. I'm all in favour of collaboration! It makes me less nervous than the talk about funding does, talk that in my experience tends to lead down cul-de-sacs, talk that more often than not leads to frustration and can be best avoided.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

No sooner had I received the August Expository Times alert earlier today than the September one arrives. Below are articles with an NT theme. As usual there are also bags of book reviews. Links below take you to abstracts; full text available for subscribers and institutional subscriptions:

This falls a little outside the usual area of coverage on the NT Gateway blog since it's connected with a controversy over American public schools, but Prof. Mark Chancey of Southern Methodist University [Mark: you need a homepage] has asked me to draw readers' attention to his report on a curriculum that is gaining widespread usage in American public schools. Mark has a letter on this in The Bible and Interpretation this week, and Jim Davila comments in Paleojudaica. Here is the website for all the relevant information:

Mark comments that he is particularly looking for support from academics, and hopes that my commenting on this here will make more aware of this. I note that already there are some big names on the Academic Endorsements page. I have not signed it myself because I am not an American citizen, but I have read it with great interest and some concern as a Biblical scholar who is also a Dad with children shortly to enter into the American public school system. I have spent some time reading Mark's report, which is available in full on the website above:

It makes for some fascinating reading. On the whole it simply documents the difficulties with the report, commenting on why given elements are problematic. I suppose the thing that most struck me was the sheer extent of the apparent plagiarism in this document and, what's more, plagiarism of on-line articles of pretty dubious worth. Mark footnotes extensively, something the curriculum itself apparently does not do. It's not just that errors abound but that it includes things like urban legends about NASA.

It's good to see Biblical scholars getting involved and making intelligent, careful, reasoned responses to important public issues like this. Incidentally, if you haven't seen it yet, Mark Chancey's The Myth of a Gentile Galilee, which is based on his Duke University PhD, is essential reading; in fact, I may make a separate blog entry in a little on what is available on-line in relation to this book.

Back in 2000 there was also a Peter Jennings ABC special focused just on Jesus and it used to have its own website -- it was a Featured Link in July 2000. But it looks like that Search for Jesus website has gone now, assimilated into Jesus and Paul.

Jim West has mentioned the latest edition of Expository Times on Biblical Theology. Here is the link to the journal and articles that will be of particular interest to NT folk. It's subscription or institutional subscription only on the full text:

I'll join Jim West in offering congratulations to Torrey Seland who has been elected a member of SNTS. From the way he expresses it (Pleasant Surprise), it sounds like becoming a member is not too stressful.

There are still a couple of seminars missing (Revelation and Second Temple Judaism), but otherwise it's almost complete. I've been sorry to do this work this year knowing that I am unlikely to be able to make it. As ever, there's lots on the programme of interest.

Update (11.59): Bridget has also sent over for me the missing NT and Second Temple Judaism abstracts and I have uploaded those too. So now we have a full seminar programme with only the exception of the Revelation seminar.

Sunday, August 07, 2005

It's a film I've not seen myself yet and I'll have to add it to my list. I have recently managed to get hold of a video of Day of Triumph from ebay, another little known Jesus film, from 1953. I must refresh my Jesus film pages and add these. I'll add to my NT Gateway "to do" list.

Friday, August 05, 2005

There have been lots of interesting blog posts on top ten lists of books on Paul and Jesus. For a good summary, see Michael Pahl's Stuff of Earth. On Hypotyposeis, What Books to Buy for Biblical Scholarship, Stephen Carlson hits a very important note, on how the beginner should build properly, from Critical Editions of the Bible, to Background texts, to Lexica and Indices and so on. There are some useful thoughts here, and for a similar reason one should be wary of embarking in a university setting on a Jesus / Paul course before one has done an Introduction to Biblical Studies as a prerequisite. I'd add something further in relation especially to Historical Jesus studies. I used to teach a one-term course on Jesus to second and third year students, but I found that it was very difficult to do this when they did not already have the necessary skills, background, methodology in place. How can you explain the way the Jesus Seminar works without first explaining how one gets to what they call the "Q Gospel"? How can one assess their assessment of the Gospel of Thomas unless one has first spent time studying that text? Happily, I was able to rework the course so that it became a two-term course, with term one on the critical study of the Gospels (and related literature) and then term two on the Gospels.

For similar reasons, and here I am influenced also by a conversation I recently had with Ken Olson, if I were to put together a top 10 list on Historical Jesus books, the majority would probably be key books you need to read before you can assess the books that are specially focused on Jesus. Yes, I'd like to have books like E. P. Sanders's Jesus and Judaism in there, of course, but I'd also strongly recommend something like Sanders' and Davies's Studying the Synoptic Gospels to get students a grounding in the preliminary questions. I might even hazard a guess that some of the problems in contemporary Historical Jesus study derive from the fact that people jump into Historical Jesus study, as if it is a discipline in its own right, before spending time working through the Synopsis, for example.

Occasionally the most absurd and yet surprisingly interesting threads break out on the blogs, and one is underway at the moment on bloggers' desks. So far we have Tyler Williams, Jim West, Tim Bulkeley and David Meadows; no doubt there are more I've forgotten. I am very tempted to join in, but regular readers will know of my rule to avoid being self-indulgent, so I will resist. But there's an assumption here that I don't share. Only one desk? Don't y'all have at least a couple, and those in addition to the makeshift desks where you take your blogging machines (kitchen table, settee, airport lounge, etc.)?

Among a ton of interesting posts this week on Codex Blogspot is one you might miss on a documentary filmed during the film of The Passion of the Christ. Tyler Williams links to the IMDb page on the film as well as its official site:

Goodness knows when we'll get to see it; it's not out on video or DVD yet as far as one can see. (Also mentioned by Jim West on Biblical Theology). If we are lucky, Peter Chattaway might be able to get a viewing and review it for us.

I had missed an interesting post in AKMA's Random Thoughts (AKMA: can't you give interesting posts like that more interesting headers than "Prior Art"?!) to which Tim Bulkeley draws attention in Sansblogue. The gist is on getting coordinated quality on-line Biblical Studies [AKMA: also Theology] materials available. Tim adds the following proposal:

So, I propose that:(a) we begin to discuss such a proposal here in blogsphere(b) those of us at SBL in Philadelphia try to meet - over coffee or a meal - to strengthen the network and begin identifying issues(c) we work towards a (CARG sponsored?) day to really work things through before SBL in 2007

I'm sympathetic with the aims here, and we can start on (a) straight away. As a first step, I'd suggest that Tim (and perhaps AKMA too?) hone precisely what the goal(s) are here. So many people are already committed to the production of quality on-line resources in our area that one might argue that the kind of thing being talked about here is already well underway, and is evolving dynamically. If the essential proposal is: how can we get a big project financed (especially AKMA)?, then there is still a large part of me that just sighs. I have felt for some time that the key to the development of exciting on-line projects in our area is the voluntary efforts of people like us. The funding comes, if you like, from two places: (1) the educational institutions that employ us and which are committed to the dissemination of our scholarship not only within their walls but also outside of them, so that our salaries here are the funding, and the time we allocate is our decision about commitment to such an important goal; (2) the self-funding provided by the gifted and enthusiastic amateurs who make such a major contribution in this area by devoting their own time. But I am of course interested in seeing and hearing about different proposals. So I'd like to repeat my question that Tim or AKMA or others begin by explaining precisely what we need in the area that can only be provided by dedicated funding.

Thursday, August 04, 2005

On the Religions of the Ancient Mediterranean Blog, it's good to read comments blogged from the current SNTS in Halle. In general, the SNTS has been something of a blog-free entity. I think AKMA has occasionally blogged from there, if memory serves, but I don't remember anyone else doing so. I suspect that this is as much as anything because few of the bibliobloggers are SNTS members. I am not, and have not been since 1997. I'd like to attend again one day.

An Interview with E. P. Sanders“Paul, Context, & Interpretation”Michael Barnes Norton, Journal of Philosophy and ScriptureAt the occasion of Syracuse University’s Postmodernism, Religion, and Culture conference, titled “Saint Paul among the Philosophers”, Michael Barnes Norton sat down with religious scholar and historian E. P. Sanders to discuss the issues at stake in philosophical interpretations of the enigmatic writings of Paul, and in general the contemporary use of ancient texts.

One of the best pieces of news about this excellent project is that the website "is planned to be free of charge". Note that the original British Library press release (11 March 2005) is still available, as is the following information page:

Several people have mentioned the CARG session on blogging at the forthcoming SBL Annual Meeting in Philadelphia. I'm pleased to hear that Torrey Seland is now a definite for the session too. If you haven't looked at it yet, Torrey has the programme for that session, which will be on the Saturday morning, just after breakfast.

Talking of breakfast, here's a tip for those at SBL on a budget (as I have often been in the past): get to one of those great American breakfast buffets and eat to your heart's content. Don't be put off by earnest looking professor types who only visit the buffet once. Keep going for as long as you can. Eat so much that you won't want lunch. You can then make it through to the evening when you'll be just peckish enough to enjoy something else. In fact you might even be invited to one of those receptions where there's lots of food in the evening too, and on days like that, you've only bought breakfast and the budget is looking healthier than it might have been.

Sean the Baptist / Σεαν ὁ βαπιστὴςThe personal blog of Revd Dr Sean Winter, covering things of interest to me in the broad areas of Baptist life and theology in the UK and elsewhere, New Testament studies and hermeneutics

I've added it to my ever-expanding blogroll (left). Featuring comments on the now Bishop of Durham like "Yes, Tom does drink Earl Grey Tea", it's clear that this is going to be well worth reading.

I thought that I'd have more time to blog since getting back to Birmingham, but alas, I spend all day every day either working (after all, the University of Birmingham are still paying me) or preparing in different ways for the move. Anyway, you don't want to know about that. Here's a link to the latest Biblical Studies Bulletin from Grove Books:

This will be of interest to some:-----------St Mary's College, University of St Andrews is pleased to announce its second conference on scripture and theology: The Epistle to the Hebrews and Christian Theology.

The conference will take place in St Andrews, Scotland, from 18-22 July, 2006. It features keynote speakers Richard Hays, Morna Hooker, and John Webster, in addition to several other internationally recognized scholars.

Those who traveled to St Andrews in 2003 to attend John & Theology will recall unique features of that conference, including a musical performance at the start of the week, a joint worship service at the end of the week, and dialogue sessions between major scholars on important issues. We fully expect Hebrews & Theology to build on these past successes.

Please consider this invitation to join us in St Andrews on 18 July 2006. For further particulars, visit our web page, clicking anywhere on the first page to enter the site: